Entries tagged with media

Weird dreams, probably due to waking up every two hours for who knows why -- last part I remember is having access to these new and exciting sweet limes -- huge and mostly juice, not pulp, bright green and so sweet that you could eat them directly or make the best limeade. Mmmmm, limeade. I think I'm dehydrated.

Just finished "Deathwish" by Rob Thurman, which...Hmm. I do believe she is quite hitting her stride. Enjoyed it very much.

I'm having a bit of sword-and-sorcery movie withdrawal. There's only so many times you can rewatch various versions of Lord of the Rings, after all. I suppose I could whip out "Troy," except it is a little short on orcs. I would settle for minotaurs. I'm in a mood. I was even willing to whip out a press copy of 300 (French and unsubbed, therefore...not quite useful!), when I realized it was at work in some cubby or other (and also, not so much with the minotaurs) -- so I found myself flipping through channels and captivated by a sudden glance of Iolaus -- Iolaus!!! conspiring evil! -- for Lo, I was watching the second half of Legend of the Seeker.

(Ah, New Zealand. You are our Fairyland, aintcha.)

(So, sort me out, then -- there is an actual series of Terry Goodkind's, er, Randian opus? Really? Hoh-kay. Good to know. All righty.)

(Was there a hint of libertarianism in Xena that I missed?)

There's a certain cheestastic joy that I was once able to take in Xena, and Roar, and even Beastmaster (and to an extent Jack of All Trades/Cleopatra Insert Numbers Here) that I don't seem to be able to anymore. I think it might be that shows in the same vein (by the same production group) made now are just as cheesy, but have no sense of their own inherent funniness. (Okay, Beastmaster had a pretty bombastic seriousness going on there, but it also had that hot half-naked guy, and also Emilie de Ravin being evil and Jackson Raine, who was adorable and amusing and I think part Cambodian.)

Okay, a few people have asked me pretty much the same things now, so let me just go through it once and for all.

1. No, nobody just showed up in my LJ and began spontaneously rattling around. I made the first move. I was Googling a work-related topic, and (to my vast disgust) could only find exactly TWO links that even remotely dealt with the topic. I made an overture to each, and invited discussion.

2. What I'm seeing as a major part of the core disagreement here is pretty valid -- it's been argued for far longer than I've been alive and I'm sure it will continue when all of us are dust. I have, however, come down on a side:

I am not an absolutist. I believe in situational ethics. I believe, very strongly, that context is key. I believe, within reason!!, in relativism. So yes, I do believe that members (and to an extent, associates) of a group have the right to terminology concerning the group that outsiders do not share. In an ideal world I've no doubt it would be different, but as it stands, there is a dynamic of enforced inferiority and superiority that is impossible when the people in question are from the same group. Or, in layman's terms, family is family. I will tease my baby sister. YOU try it, and I'll take you down.

So the young woman in question saw my use of the adjective "blackish" ["black(ish?)" to be precise] as a diminutive, and therefore disrespectful. I put it forth, however, as a shorthand, lighthearted query to an audience that had absolutely no reason to misunderstand me (via cunning use of flags use of punctuation. A query which, by the way, none of you have answered yet. You're totally going to make me go to those obnoxious IMDB message boards with the 13-year-olds, aren't you. ;-)

We are coming from entirely different directions, essentially. Misinterpretation is, therefore, all too easy. She is coming from an arena where a disturbingly large amount of fanfiction writers are being arguably exploitative of black sexuality.

I am coming from an arena where the very presence of a black child (in the 21st century!) on the cover of an international magazine STILL returned us the lowest newsstand sales of that entire year. (I have since quit and gone elsewhere, and am not aware if they tried it again in the interim. But there was a quantifiable difference between that cover and the cover featuring an East Asian child -- and even that one wasn't anywhere nearly as high as the regular "mainstream" covers, either. And I could go on about the whys and wherefores of that all day. I might, sometime. God, there is fodder. Industrywide fodder. There have been so many thwarted attempts, and blame is, surprisingly, not all that easily pinned.)

I'm coming from an arena where, for example, I've had a colleague who has never heard of fanfiction call me repeatedly, once in tears, because she could not find a single Asian or black celebrity "mainstream" and "recognizable-to-the-audience" enough to satisfy the editor-in-chief for an article on celeb dads, in time for deadline. (We have Denzel and Will, apparently, and THAT IS ALL. *headdesks bloody* And South Asia does not exist. Oy.* )

I'm in arena in which (where I am now) we've gotten letters of abject, tearful gratitude for the one black (non-U.S., in this case) face we've had on the cover in what I'm willing to bet is two years. (Not to mention the long-ass fight I had to have with the story editor over why it was simply not accurate -- not a house style question, NOT a query for the ed-in-chief, NOT a reason to call any meetings, but a very, very simple FACTUAL INNACURACY, a freaking lie if you will -- to call the woman "African-American" when she wasn't from the bloody U.S.) (Not to mention as well the outright unvarnished racial segregation in certain bookstores which is pretty much guaranteeing that black authors -- and other authors of color overall, but this chain is ONLY Jim Crowing segregating Af-Am and nobody else -- will continue to earn significantly less than their white counterparts for the same amount of work. The same TYPE of work. Even if the white counterparts choose to feature characters of color.)

So yeah, my goals, and my instinctive reactions, are gonna be quite different. We are still fighting for basic visibility, really.

I do not anticipate any further interaction concerning this, to be honest. Not because of any of the above, which are extremely discussable points.

Partially because ladyegreen appears to kind of like me, a bit. (Boy, do I have her fooled. ~___^ BAHAHHAHAHAHA!!!)

But mainly because...hmmm. There is a dynamic that my own nature tends to allow to flourish, to my detriment; a dynamic of supplication. It's taken me a lot of years to identify and become able to nip in the bud. It's not a dynamic of peers, or equals, and it's...pretty toxic. Therefore, *nip*. Namely:

I will not be a supplicant. I will be submitting no applications for worthiness to be spoken to. And although I think, or I like to think, that I am pretty open to discussing most anything with anybody as a peer -- at least as long we're all following as certain basic logic-class parameters -- I will not be taking lessons in How to Be Properly Black from someone who, if I am to go by her statements, seems to have been in high school on my 30th birthday.**

So yeah. Not incredibly interested in pursuing that again ever.

She is talented, and I wish her well. Her generation will have a lot to offer the world, but the world is looking increasingly vile in a great many new and disconcerting ways, from where I'm standing. They will need to be smart, strong, and fairly silver-tongued. If they want anyone to listen at all.

*I think that was around the time luckykitty introduced me to Oded Behr? (yum ^_^) Which...thank you! But sadly he didn't come anywhere near enough to satisfying the "of color" criteria we were given.

** Jesus H. Christ on a vinyl record... 0_o

EDIT. Meh. I had disabled the comments, but you know what? I think anyone who would even bother to comment on this one is quite mature enough not to let it devolve into either a hate- or a woobiepoorthing-fest. There's plenty of fodder for objective discussion. So! Moving on, and on to the issues of import.

> Sarah Michelle Gellar and her hit show Buffy The Vampire Slayer has been> blamed for over 50,000 women leaving the Christian churches in England.> > Dr. Kristin Aune, from the University of Derby has said young women are not> going to church because they “link it with traditional values” and they are> into witch craft because of the show.> > She says, “In short, women are abandoning the church. Because of its focus> on female empowerment, young women are attracted by Wicca, popularised by> the TV series Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Young women tend to express> egalitarian values and dislike the traditionalism and hierarchies they> imagine are integral to the church.”> > She also believes that women feel the church denies their sexual desires and> that work/family lives are also the reason.> > Aune got the numbers from the English Church Census while researching for> her new book “Women and Religion in the West”>

It is simply ASTOUNDING the lengths people will go to to find a single, controllable culprit for any societal trend.

Nothing about how more and more women are financially independent than ever before, which lends itself to seeking other forms of independence. Or maybe that the scientific mindset nudges people away from looking for arbitrary supernatural authority. Or reproductive freedom. Or the fact that marriage (or more and more commonly partnership) is optional and love-based instead of financially and socially necessary (for the safety net of heirs and of stable and/or influential in-laws), which makes far more people of either (any?) gender more willing to go it alone and less willing to be told what to do...

No, it's gotta be BUFFY. Get rid of that and everything will revert to the wholesome (and wholly fictional) purity and awesomeness of 1912.

(Plus it TOTALLY DISREGARDS THE MISTS OF AVALON. ^_____^)(What? That's what *I* saw sending people over to Wicca and pseudoWicca back in the 90s, when mentioning Buffy love would still get you laughed at.)

Belated:The cover -- I've been turning that one around in my head. (Do you know, at first glimpse I thought it was supposed to be a gay couple consisting of a Navy guy and an Army guy -- and spent some time trying to figure out what the hell they were trying to satirize with THAT.) (I confess I was intrigued.)

My first thoughts were not offense (because it's the New Yorker, for crying out loud -- I know where they stand, and they do what they do). My thoughts were, essentially, "WOW, they didn't think that one through, did they."

If they didn't realize how it would be taken, they were stupid. If they didn't realize how the very people they were satirizing would take it and run with it, then they were stupid.

Stupid ain't a crime, I guess.

That said, it doesn't really change much for me. He that loves will love still, he that is ambivalent will be ambivalent still, he that is a goddamn hater will remain so. It is, at best, a kerfluffle. There will be more. It's not like I'm going to stop reading the New Yorker. (Heh, although it's not like I bought it with any great frequency since I canceled my subscription in, like, 1995, and they kept sending me issues for three more years. (O_o) Online linkage does me fine, thanky.)

There are certain things you don't do, not because they are wrong, but because there are always wolves at the gates. You keep your in-jokes in, you keep your family laundry in your own yard, and you keep your own counsel (that is to say, your mouth shut).

I don't always adhere to that the way I'd like, but I do enjoy imagining how life would be flawless and uncomplicated if I could. ~___^

I have a million things piling up that I want to post about. I'll wind up posting about none of them, I'm sure, which I find sad. This one is seriously starting to irk me, though.

I Have Loved...

Er, Borders? What the hell is going on? I remember when you were the one last bastion of awesome because you refused to play into the system of remaindering. You went up against Barnes and Noble, and you didn't win, but your integrity in supporting authors was noted.

That was then. This is now.

When I go to a Barnes and Noble, say for example the one in Union Square, I see a section on the top floor across from Sci-Fi called "African American Interest." It's full of photo essays, history books, sociology books -- sundry nonfiction like that. It's next to the sections on "Judaica," "Asian American Interest," "Native American Studies," "Hispanic Studies," and so on. Adjacent to "Sociology," "Gender Studies," "Gay and Lesbian," "Biography," "Religion," et cetera. This is logical and makes sense.

When I go to a Borders, say for example the Borders at Madison Square Garden, I see sections entitled "New," "Sci-Fi," "Romance," "Mystery," "Literature," "Literary Criticism," "Poetry," "Horror," and "African American Literature."

I spent a really long time looking for a novel yesterday in the sci-fi section -- bafflingly long -- trying to find a sci-fi book. Because it was a book of, you know, sci-fi. By a writer who is known as, and has won awards as, and is established and entrenched as a writer of -- please say it with me now -- SCI-FI.

After much searching along the wall, then succumbing to the computerized database (I know, I coulda gone there first but it became a point of honor) I found it. In "African American Literature" -- a single bank of awkwardly placed back-to-back shelves, close enough to the register to keep folks from stealin', far away enough from the main browsing floor areas to go completely ignored, adjacent to the poetry. Alongside Zane's lesbian erotica, Barack Obama's memoir, LA Banks' vampire-huntress horror stories, Toni Morrison, Ntozake Shange, Toni Cade Bambera, and the fiction and critical social essays of James Baldwin.

Celebrities are a dime a dozen, they are not role models. They are not obligated to make you happy or sad about their private lives. They are not obligated to teach you or your family about a GOD DAMN thing. If anything our lack of role models in day to day life is harming all of us. If you are looking to a TV Screen or a Movie Screen or a Band to be good role models for your children than you are backing out of being that role model yourself.

Can we get this speech on prime time? Please? Loudly and often? Because people are slacking.

"It is amazing to me how judged we are. Teenage girls, that is. What the hell has made us the subject of abuse from our own gender, let alone the women we are aspiring to be? Women who are, humor me here, ten or so years older than us are saying that we don't fit their mold. What is their mold? It seems to be someone who cannot be emotional. It's someone who can't talk about boys, can't be interested in fashion, can't go to parties, and can't EVER have sex or else we are sluts. Call me crazy, but I think a lot of these women who are criticizing girls my age are guilty of one or two of those things during their teenage years. Second of all, what about the boys? I've felt, for the past four years of my high school career, that boys get off the hook. Whether it be for cursing in class, skipping school, or having bad manners, that is what is 'expected' of them. When they lose their virginity, they aren't a "bad" boy. I'm TIRED of the standards for us and not for them. It makes me hold a grudge against them and the adults who set the standards (like teachers, youth leaders, etc.) and I'm sorry to say that, but it's the truth.

"I've found that girls who pretend to be dumb have issues with who they are and how they want people to perceive them. Maybe they haven't had a good family history and they don't know how else to make people pay attention to them. However, some just don't care. Why does it matter what impression they give? It's their decision to act that way, and even if you think it's the wrong one, its not yours to make. Even if some girls my age have given a negetive impression to the outside world, I am proud to be a part of my generation. I am informed. I read, I am an active member in the classroom (especially when it comes to politics) and I am a college-bound division I athlete. I respect people, no matter where they come from or what they are interested in. Most girls at my school are intelligent, beautiful in every form of the word except superficial, and witty. I can see the justification for concern with teenage girls today, but don't you think that there's plenty of smart, hard-working girls who don't buy into the media? Just because I like to read "People" every once and a while doesn't make me a flake. Just because I use a cuss word or I have taken a sip (don't tell me you haven't because you have) of alcohol doesn't make me any less credible as a thinking, beautiful woman.

"We make it sound so awful to be feminine. Don't get me wrong, I'm not one to cry over ruining a shoe or breaking a nail that I don't have, but I like to look nice and I like to shop. I like to talk about boys, and I love to have girl time with my friends. But think about it; "girl time" isn't what it used to be. It's real and honest and we talk about what's important to us. We talk about the future with war and the environment (and we throw in what we're going to wear to our graduation party as well). We talk about the people that are important to us, and most importantly, we talk about what we're going through. I am proud to love babies and I want to have a family someday, but I am also proud to be loud,outgoing and opinionated. I know what I am capable of, and I will be something great. I will be fierce and solid when I am a lawyer. I am proud to be a female, I am proud to be feminine, and I am not perfect. But I'm as close as you're going to get to the "ideal" woman. Strong, happy, and dangerous to the male-dominated society we are dismantling as we speak. I am 18 and blonde, and I am not a flake."

"I find the article valid not on the basis of whether it is adult who worship at the cult of celebrity vs. the youth, but rather that it is less likely that the male celebs are running around working hard to look trashy & stupid as so many young female celebs are. Few male examples occur except perhaps the crew of the show Jackass. It is not intellectual elitism to criticize this trend as previous poster Patrica Swartz(man?) asserts, that argument fails with the subjects themselves. Intellectuals aren't the only ones critizing the dumb. See the Nicole/Paris feud, and the Paris/Lindsay feud, and the slander lawsuits against Paris for that evidence (somewhat ashamed I even know about this drivel). It is truly ironic that there is such a huge national push to get kids to do well in school, where we will earnestly lay the blame for a child's failure at the feet of teachers and the school system, while we allow the greater american culture to continually bury the cultural respect for any public display of intelligence firmly six feet under. This is only a subset of a much larger problem. We ourselves undermine relevance and significance daily with an endless barrage of mindless celeb trivia consumption in television, print and all other media. We all fully reinforce the idea that smart just ain't cool and if we don't demand better, why should our teens?"

MSM S&M by James Wood Post date: 05.11.06Issue date: 05.22.06Was Stephen Colbert funny? No, he was not being funny. He was being ironic, satirical, brutal. Don't you get it? These issues are just too painful for humor. Since Colbert's 20-minute routine at the White House Correspondents' Association Dinner two weeks ago, the question has been asked and answered thus in the blogosphere, that underground realm of steaming ressentiment not exactly famous for the refinement of its irony, where the president is the "chimp," Laura is "his bitch wife," and the press is "the MSM."

It is time--it is always time--for some literary criticism. ( Read more... )

The mainstream news isn't even MENTIONING it. Anyone who [still? and why???] gets their news from television will have never even heard of this at all.

But they concentrate on how "cute" Bush's comedy was, when he mimes looking under tables in the White House for WMD.

*insert long string of expletives*

Our outrage should flow into the streets.New York Times, you have let me down for the last time.

Fuck it, I'm reprinting it. This is what he said, people, to George W. Bush's face. (He even disses Cheney and the hunting incident!!)--------------------------"Thank you ladies and gentlemen. Before I begin, I've been asked to make an announcement. Whoever parked 14 black bullet proof S.U.V.'S out front, could you please move them. They are blocking in 14 other black bulletproof S.U.V.'S and they need to get out.Wow, wow, what an honor. The White House Correspondents' Dinner. To just sit here, at the same table with my hero, George W. Bush, to be this close to the man. I feel like I'm dreaming. Somebody pinch me. You know what, I'm a pretty sound sleeper, that may not be enough. Somebody shoot me in the face.

Is he really not here tonight? The one guy who could have helped. By the way, before I get started, if anybody needs anything at their tables, speak slowly and clearly on into your table numbers and somebody from the N.S.A. Will be right over with a cocktail.

Mrs. Smith, ladies and gentlemen of the press corps, Mr. President and first lady, my name is Stephen Colbert and it's my privilege tonight to celebrate our president. He's no so different, he and I. We get it. We're not brain backs on the nerd patrol. We're not members of the fact (police). We go straight from the gut, right sir? That's where the truth lies, right down here in the gut. Do you know you have more nerve endings in your gut than you have in your head? You can look it up. I know some of you are going to say I did look it up, and that's not true. That's but you looked it up in a book.

Next time look it up in your gut. I did. My gut tells me that's how our nervous system works. Every night on my show, the Colbert report, I speak straight from the gut, ok? I give people the truth, unfiltered by rational argument. I call it the no fact zone. Fox News, I own the copyright on that term.

I'm a simple man with a simple mind, with a simple set of beliefs that I live by. Number one, I believe in America. I believe it exists.

My gut tells me I live there. I feel that it extends from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and I strongly believe it has 50 states. And I cannot wait to see how "the Washington Post" spins that one tomorrow. I believe in democracy. I believe democracy is our greatest export. At least until China figures out a way to stamp it out in plastic for three cents a unit.

In fact, ambassador, welcome, your great country makes our happy meals possible. I said it's a celebration. I believe the government that governs best is the government that governs least. And by these standards, we have set up a fabulous government in Iraq.

I believe in pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps. I believe it is possible -- I saw this guy do it once in Cirque du Soleil. It was magical. And though I am a committed Christian, I believe that everyone has the right to their own religion, be it Hindu, Jewish or Muslim. I believe in infinite paths to accepting Jesus Christ as your personal savior.Ladies and gentlemen, I believe it's yogurt. But I refuse to believe it's not butter. Most of all I believe in this president.

Now, I know there's some polls out there saying this man has a 32% approval rating. But guys like us, we don't pay attention to the polls. We know that polls are just a collection of statistics that reflect what people are thinking in "reality." And reality has a well-known liberal bias.

So, Mr. President, pay no attention to the people that say the glass is half full. 32% means the glass -- it's important to set up your jokes properly, sir. Sir pay no attention to the people who say the glass is half empty, because 32% means it's 2/3 empty. There's still some liquid in that glass is my point, but I wouldn't drink it. The last third is usually backwash.

Folks, my point is that I don't believe this is a low point in this presidency. I believe it is just a lull, before a comeback.

I mean, it's like the movie "Rocky." The president is Rocky and Apollo Creed is everything else in the world. It's the 10th round. He's bloodied, his corner man, Mick, who in this case would be the Vice President, and he's yelling cut me, dick, cut me, and every time he falls she say stay down! Does he stay down? No. Like Rocky he gets back up and in the end he -- actually loses in the first movie. Ok. It doesn't matter.

The point is the heart-warming story of a man who was repeatedly punched in the face. So don't pay attention to the approval ratings that say 68% of Americans disapprove of the job this man is doing. I ask you this, does that not also logically mean that 68% approve of the job he's not doing? Think about it. I haven't.

I stand by this man. I stand by this man because he stands for things. Not only for things, he stands on things. Things like aircraft carriers and rubble and recently flooded city squares. And that sends a strong message, that no matter what happens to America, she will always rebound with the most powerfully staged photo ops in the world.

Now, there may be an energy crisis. This president has a very forward-thinking energy policy. Why do you think he's down on the ranch cutting that brush all the time? He's trying to create an alternative energy source. By 2008 we will have a mesquite powered car.

And I just like the guy. He's a good joe. Obviously loves his wife, calls her his better half. And polls show America agrees. She's a true lady and a wonderful woman. But I just have one beef, ma'am. I'm sorry, but this reading initiative. I've never been a fan of books. I don't trust them. They're all fact, no heart. I mean, they're elitist telling us what is or isn't true, what did or didn't happen. What's Britannica to tell me the Panama Canal was built in 1914. If I want to say it was built in 1941, that's my right as an American. I'm with the president, let history decide what did or did not happen.

The greatest thing about this man is he's steady. You know where he stands. He believes the same thing Wednesday, that he believed on Monday, no matter what happened Tuesday. Events can change, this man's beliefs never will.

And as excited as I am to be here with the president, I am appalled to be surrounded by the liberal media that is destroying America, with the exception of Fox News. Fox News gives you both sides of every story, the President's side and the Vice President's side.

But the rest of you, what are you thinking, reporting on N.S.A. wiretapping or secret prisons in Eastern Europe? Those things are secret for a very important reason, they're superdepressing. And if that's your goal, well, misery accomplished.

Over the last five years you people were so good over tax cuts, W.M.D. intelligence, the affect of global warming. We Americans didn't want to know, and you had the courtesy not to try to find out. Those were good times, as far as we knew.

But, listen, let's review the rules. Here's how it works. The President makes decisions, he's the decider. The Press Secretary announces those decisions, and you people of the press type those decisions down. Make, announce, type. Put them through a spell check and go home.

Get to know your family again. Make love to your wife. Write that novel you got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration. You know, fiction.

Because really, what incentive do these people have to answer your questions, after all? I mean, nothing satisfies you. Everybody asks for personnel changes. So the White House has personnel changes. Then you write they're just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

First of all, that is a terrible metaphor. This administration is not sinking. This administration is soaring. If anything, they are rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg.

Now, it's not all bad guys out there. Some heroes, Buckley, Kim Schieffer. By the way, Mr. President, thank you for agreeing to be on my show. I was just as shocked as everyone here is I promise you. How is Tuesday for you? I've got Frank Rich, but we can bump him.

And I mean bump him. I know a guy. Say the word.

See who we've got here tonight. General Mowsly, Air Force Chief of Staff. General Peter Pace. They still support Rumsfeld. You guys aren't retired yet, right? Right, they still support Rumsfeld.

Look, by the way, I've got a theory about how to handle these retired generals causing all this trouble, don't let them retire. C'mon, we've got a stop loss program, let's use it on these guys. If you're strong enough to go on one of those pundit shows, you can stand on a bank of computers and order men into battle. C'mon.

Jesse Jackson is here. I had him on the show. Very interesting and challenging interview. You can ask him anything, but he's going to say what he wants at the pace that he wants. It's like boxing a glacier.

Enjoy that metaphor, because your grandchildren will have no idea what a glacier is.

Justice Scalia's here. May I be the first to say welcome, sir. You look fantastic. How are you? (imitates hostile gestures Scalia was reported to have made)

John McCain is here. John McCain John McCain. What a maverick. Somebody find out what fork he used on his salad, because I guarantee you wasn't a salad fork. He could have used a spoon. There's no predicting him. So wonderful to see you coming back into the republican fold. I have a summerhouse in South Carolina, look me up when you go to speak at Bob Jones University. So glad you've seen the light.

Mayor Nagin is here from New Orleans, the chocolate city. Yeah, give it up. Mayor Nagin, I would like to welcome you to Washington, D.C., The chocolate city with a marshmallow center. And a graham cracker crust of corruption. It's a mallomar is what I'm describing, a seasonal cookie.

Joe Wilson is here, the most famous husband since Desi Arnez. And of course he brought along his lovely wife Valerie Plame. Oh, my god! Oh, what have I said. I am sorry, Mr. President, I meant to say he brought along his lovely wife, Joe Wilson's wife. Pat Fitzgerald is not here tonight? Dodged a bullet.

And we can't forget man of the hour, new Press Secretary, Tony Snow. Secret service name, Snow Job. What a hero, took the second toughest job in government, next to, of course, the ambassador to Iraq. Got some big shoes to fill, Tony. Scott McClellan could say nothing like nobody else.

McClellan, eager to retire. Really felt like he needed to spend more time with Andrew Card's children.

Mr. President, I wish you hadn't made the decision so quickly, sir. I was vying for the job. I think I would have made a fabulous press secretary. I have nothing but contempt for these people. I know how to handle these clowns. In fact, sir, I brought along an audition tape and with your indulgence, I'd like to at least give it a shot. So, ladies and gentlemen, my press conference. "

No, it wasn't fucking funny, New York Times, Slate.com, Noam bloody Schreiber. What about the current world we're in makes you think it should have been???------------------------Now up on YouTube:part1http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcIRXur61II

In what corner of the multiverse could that be considered bad news for women? Why the leap? Why are people (THE MEDIA) so fuckng childish??

Now, if there had been any attempt at intelligent debate here, it might have touched on some important topics, like the future of Social Security and Medicare and the upside-down age pyramid structure that we're going to have to deal with in about ten years.

But no. "Bad News for Women." ALL women. Like it's some kind of goddamned playground score we're keeping here.

How can I put this, so that I won't be misinterpreted? I think I'll just link you here and then go on to say what I bloody well have to say.

What the hell?

Why is is "shocking" and "unbelievably cruel" that Massaoui "wants to see September 11 happen again and again"? Where is the surprise? Why is anyone at all waiting for a Hollywood "redemption" story arc, here? Why is anyone emotionally moved in the slightest?

Why is it surprising if your enemy wants you dead???

How can you get offended at that?

It is what it is, folks. Why the feigned shock?

Are we all going to get worked up into a froth, and then kill him, and then feel better and it will all have worked out, and justice done, eye for eye, children cheer, and roll credits?

If he dies it will simply remove him from the world and cut his ability to foment anything else that is detrimental to his avowed enemies, who would rather be alive, thanks. Not some bullshit catharsis.

Rights or wrongs of the death penalty (or whatever verdict it winds up being) aside, I do not get the hand wringing and shock. Shock!

Shock and vengeaaaaaaaaaaance!!!!

Please.

Mourn the dead, mourn the loss, fine, but waste time caring about what this guy has to say? Why should he have one iota of power to affect my feelings now?

What for?

AND WHY HAS IT BEEN RUNNING ON THE NEWS FOR TWENTY-FOUR HOURS STRAIGHT???

"Massaoui said even MORE mean things today! *sniff* Tonight, on news at ten!"

-----------------------ETA: I am counting the instants untilBrickcomes out...-----------------------E again TA: Aw shucks, the video's been taken down. Go to ladyegreen's journal here for a summary of what it was. I'm going trolling for backup copies. ^_^ -----------------------E yet again TA: Here we go:

Personally? I am downloading this puppy NOW.-----------------------E once more TA: Nope... it's gone. Bummer.-----------------------Edited for the very last time To Add:Because ladyegreen is a fooking gen - i - ouse, and actually wrote to people who contacted Joseph Gordon-Levitt hisself, an unbroken link (to Levitt's own site) has been obtained.